Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2008

Chilcoat, James E. v. Victoria County Airport Commission and Victoria County

Chilcoat, James E. v. Victoria County Airport Commission and Victoria County
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided May 15, 2008

Chilcoat, James E. v. Victoria County Airport Commission and Victoria County

Opinion











NUMBER 13-90-117-CV



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

JAMES E. CHILCOAT, Appellant,



v.



VICTORIA COUNTY AIRPORT COMMISSION

AND VICTORIA COUNTY, Appellees.

_____________________________________________________________



On appeal from the 24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________



MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam



This appeal was abated by this Court on June 29, 1990, due to the bankruptcy of appellant, James E. Chilcoat. See 11 U.S.C. § 362; see generally Tex. R. App. P. 8. On March 6, 2008, this Court entered an order requiring the parties to file, within fourteen days of the date of that order, an advisory regarding the status of this appeal and, if applicable, a motion to reinstate the appeal or a motion to dismiss the appeal.

On March 14, 2008, appellees, Victoria County Airport Commission and Victoria County, filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). According to appellees' motion, appellant's bankruptcy was dismissed more than fifteen years ago and there has been no activity in this appeal during that period of time.

On March 28, 2008 appellant filed a pro se motion asking this Court to retain the appeal and abate the appeal for 120 days to allow appellant to retain an attorney and present "a more detailed petition to protect my rights." Appellant's motion fails to provide a reasonable explanation for the lack of activity in this appeal for the past fifteen years.

Given the foregoing, the Court GRANTS appellees' motion to dismiss and DENIES appellant's motion to retain. The Court DISMISSES this appeal for want of prosecution. See id. Other pending motions, if any, are likewise DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the15th day of May, 2008.









Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.